Vita Bobelis
Carl-Harry Doirin
Chris Gryniewicz
BUY
Current Price:
Intrinsic Value: $42.51
$57.36
Investment Thesis
Current Price:
Market Cap:
52-Week range :
$42.51
$36.4 billion
$34.72-$62.09
50-Day MA:
$44.85
200-Day MA:
$47.80
Intrinsic Value:
$57.36
Beta :
1.6
P/E:
16.23
P/S:
3.69
P/B:
4.05
ROE:
Diluted EPS:
Shares Out:
19.32%
$1.73
822.92M
Keypoints
• Located in most popular casino destinations in the world.
• Holding a duopoly in Singapore until 2017 and one of six
licenses in Macao.
• Strong double-digit growth. • Lower debt-to-equity than competitors. • Convention based model decreases cyclicality. Risks
• Loss of subconcession in Macao or concession in Singapore.
• Online gambling could decline revenues for traditional brick
and mortar casinos.
• Retirement of Sheldon Adelson.
• Pending litigation by the Department of Justice.
• Growing popularity of regional casinos could erode market
share for Las Vegas casinos. 1
Company Profile
Las Vegas Sands Corp (LVS) is a
leading global developer of resort
properties that feature premium
accommodations, world-class
gambling, entertainment, and retail,
convention and exhibition facilities,
celebrity chef restaurants and other
amenities. Founded in 1988 by
Sheldon Adelson, the company’s
geographic diversity, best-in-class
properties, and convention-based
business model have allowed it to
establish an impressive platform
in the hospitality and gaming
industry. Its unique conventionbased marketing strategy allows
it to attract business travellers
during the slow mid-week periods,
while leisure travelers fill its
properties during the weekends.
LVS was awarded one of six
subconcessionaires to operate four
resorts in Macao: The Venetian
Macao, The Four Seasons Macao,
The Sands Macao, and The Sands
Cotai Central which opened its
second phase in September of
2012. The Macao properties have
approximately 822,000 square feet
of gaming space, 1,140 game tables,
3,280 slot machines, and upon
completion of the Sands Cotai
Central will have well over 9,900
luxurious suites. In Singapore, Las
Vegas Sands was awarded one of
two concessions to develop and
operate two integrated resorts.
Ideally positioned to cater to both
business and leisure travelers in
Singapore, the Marina Bay Sands
features 2,600 suites in three
elegant hotel towers, 160,000
square feet of gaming space, 600
gaming tables, and 2,500 slot
machines. The company’s Las Vegas
properties include The Venetian
Las Vegas, The Palazzo, and The
Sands Bethlehem. Combined, these
properties feature over 11,000
rooms and suites, 377,000 square
feet of gaming space,
340 table games,
and 5,700 slot
machines. With
over 2.3 million
gross square
feet of state-ofthe-art exhibit and
convention rooms, the Sands
Expo Center is one of the world’s
largest trade show and convention
facilities.
Macreconomic Analysis
Quantitative easing measures
taken by central banks will allow
easier access to capital, resulting
in higher spending. We anticipate
higher demand among consumer
discretionary segments due to
an emerging global middle class.
Greater acceptance of gambling,
as indicated by a recent Gallup
poll, growing popularity of online
gambling, and the World Series
of Poker will likely lead to higher
casino visitation worldwide.
Highly leveraged nations are
considering the relaxation of
gambling regulations in an effort to
raise tax revenue.
2
Industry Analysis
Global Casino Revenue Breakdown
2011
2015
in the US, has not seen the market
share erosions from regional
casinos.
Las Vegas will be inversely affected
by growth in Asian markets, as it
competes with these regions as a
global destination for gambling. We
anticipate revenue gains averaging
5% each year, to $13 billion in 2015
from $10.4 billion in 2010.
Online Gambling
In 2011, global casino revenue rose
9.6%. Both EMEA (Europe, Middle
East, and Africa) and Canada saw
declines of 7.2% and 2.9%. Asia
Pacific recorded the most dramatic
improvement, led mostly by new
markets in Singapore and Macao,
increasing revenues by 49.7% over
the prior year. Both Latin America
and the United States saw modest
growth of 5.5% and 5.1%. Spending
in Latin America is expected
to improve as new casinos are
established in the region.
We expect casino revenue across
the US, EMEA, Asia Pacific, Latin
America, and Canada to grow at
9.2% CAGR for the next five years,
rising from $117.6 billion in 2010
to $182.8 billion in 2015.
Our projections assume strong
growth in Asia to result in 43%
of the market share by 2015.
Logistical improvements including
a new railway to connect Macao
to Guangzhou and a road bridge
from Hong Kong through Zhuhai
and Macao to be major catalysts for
growth. Singapore has experienced
strong growth since eliminating
anti-gambling regulation in 2009.
We expect revenues to increase to
$7 billion in 2015 from $4 billion in
2011.
Casino revenues in the United
States declined during the Great
Recession, which led to many
developers stalling projects for
new facilities. As consumer
discretionary spending increased
during 2010 and 2011, revenues
have returned to their
pre-recessionary levels. We expect
steady growth in this region, which
is the result of improving economic
conditions and more Americans
viewing gambling as a morally
acceptable activity.
Atlantic City’s market share has
been eroded by growth in the
regional casino market, especially
by facilities built in Pennsylvania.
We expect this trend to continue
during our forecast period. Atlantic
City’s 2015 revenues are likely to
be below their 2010 levels. Las
Vegas, which relies on players from
overseas more than other casinos
Since the global financial crisis,
views on online gambling have
been more positive, due to its
tax revenue generating ability.
We expect federal legislation to
be passed in the United States to
legalize and regulate online poker
during our forecast period.
Two pieces of current legislation in
the United States prohibit online
gambling. The Federal Wire Act
of 1961 bans the placing of sports
bets over the telephone. On April
15, 2011, a federal grand jury in
New York used this law to shut
down PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker,
and Absolute Poker / Ultimate Bet.
The Unlawful Internet Gambling
Enforcement Act (UIGEA) of
2006 prohibits banks and other
institutions from transferring funds
to offshore gaming sites in support
of illegal online gaming.
We expect that online gambling will
be implemented during our forecast
period and it will resemble a 2010
bill proposed by Senator Harry
Reid. The proposal will allow casino
companies to set up their own
online poker sites, exempt from
UIGEA, for their customers to use.
3
Legislation and Regulation
Macao
LVS entered into a subconcession
agreement with Galaxy which
allowed it to develop and operate
certain casino projects in Macao.
Under the agreement, which
expires in June 2022, the company
is subject to licensing and control
under applicable Macao law and
is obliged to pay the government
an annual premium with a fixed
portion (approximately $3.7
million) and a variable portion
(approximately $5.6 million) based
on the number and type of gaming
tables employed and gaming
machines operated. LVS must pay a
special gaming tax of 35% of gross
gaming revenues and applicable
withholding taxes. It must also
contribute 4% of gross gaming
revenue to utilities designated
by the Macao government, a
portion of which must be used for
promotion of tourism in Macao.
Singapore
Marina Bay Sands Pte. Ltd.(MBS),
a subsidiary of Las Vegas Sands,
holds one of two concessions
to develop and operate the
Marina Bay Sands. As a result
of the Development Agreement,
restrictions limiting the use of the
leased land to the development
and operation of the project. It
requires MBS to invest at least
$2.96 billion in the integrated
resort, to be allocated in specified
amounts among the casino, hotel,
retail, convention facilities, etc. by
2013. There is a goods and services
tax of 7% imposed on gross gaming
revenue and a casino tax of 15%
imposed on the gross gaming
revenue from the casino after the
reduction for the amount of goods
and services tax. The casino tax is
deductible against the Singapore
corporate taxable income.
State of Nevada
LVS is licensed by the Nevada
Gaming Authorities to operate both
The Venetian Las Vegas and The
Palazzo as a single resort hotel as
set forth in the Nevada Act. The
license requires periodic payment
of fees and taxes. Depending on
upon the particular fee or tax
involved, they are typically based
upon a percentage of gross revenue
received, the number of gaming
devices operated, or the number
of table games operated. The
tax on gross revenue received is
generally 6.75%, and an excise is
paid on charges for admission to
any facility where certain forms of
live entertainment are provided.
The Nevada Act requires any
person who acquires more than
5% of voting shares to report
the acquisition to the Nevada
Commission.
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Sands Bethworks Gaming is
subject to the rules and regulations
promulgated by the Pennsylvania
Gaming Control Board (PaGCB)
and the Pennsylvania Department
of Revenue, the on-site direction of
the Pennsylvania State Police and
the requirements of other agencies.
The company must inform the
PaCGB of any contemplated change
of control.
Pending Litigation
Las Vegas Sands is involved in
a lawsuit with the former CEO
of Sands China, Steve Jacobs,
who claims he was wrongfully
terminated. Jacobs is seeking
roughly $100 million in damages.
Additionally the justice department
is investigating LVS for money
laundering. In 2007, plans for
the Adelson Center for U.S.China Enterprise in Beijing
were announced. Its purpose
was to aid U.S. businesses in
expanding into Chinese markets.
The center never opened, due
to the economic downturn in
2008 and a management change
at Las Vegas Sands. It is now
under scrutiny by the Justice
Department, the Securities and
Exchange Commission, and the
company’s audit committee for
possible violations of the Foreign
Corrupt Practices Act. In early
November, the company and justice
department are in discussion to
settle the charges that could result
in Las Vegas Sands paying a fine
and changing the way it handles
customer money, in exchange for
prosecutors dropping their threat to
indict the company.
4
Las Vegas Sands Revenue Analysis
Total Revenue Growth Matrix
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2007
24%
Over the past 5 years, Las Vegas
Sands has seen impressive
double- digit revenue growth, apart
from 2009, when the company
recorded a mere 4% growth over
2008. The company believes it
can maintain double digit level
growth through expansionary
projects in Asia. Las Vegas Sands’
revenues come primarily from
2008
49%
33%
2009
51%
35%
5%
2010
67%
57%
36%
33%
casino operations followed by
room revenue. Since beginning
operations in Asia, LVS has gained
significant market share from the
area with an astounding 57% of
its casino revenues coming from
Macao in 2011, the second largest
majority being made up from
Singapore. Surprisingly, its Las
Vegas properties made up merely
2011
76%
69%
53%
52%
27%
6% of casino revenue, though it
holds the largest portion of revenue
from rooms and suites. With
continued expansion and maturity
as premier vacation locations
in Asia, we expect Macao and
Singapore to continue to make up
the majorities of casino revenues
and increase their share of room
revenue.
Casino Revenue by Region
Total Revenue Breakdown
Room Revenue by Region
Revenue Growth
5
Porter’s 5 Forces Analysis
Buyer Power - Low
Buyer power is low, due to a large
number of customers with small
transactions per customer. Casinos
increase switching costs and build
brand loyalty by enticing customers
through VIP and rewards programs
and offering differentiated slot
machines or tables. Buyer power is
reduced further by lack of rational
decision making from gambling
addiction further decreasing the
ability of consumers to impact
pricing.
Supplier Power – Moderate
Large supplier companies such as
International Game Technology
(IGT), WMS Industries and
Shuffle Master hold power as they
produce top of the range machines,
which consumers want to play. As
the industry has shifted globally,
foreign firms are entering into game
manufacturing, which weakens
supplier power.
Threats of New Entry – High
Regulation in the casino industry is
a major barrier to entry. Growing
popularity of gambling led to
an increased acceptance, which
resulted in more casinos. Until
1985, casinos were legal only in
Nevada and Atlantic City, but
today 12 states allow commercial
land-based casinos, while 29 states
have Native American reservation
casinos.
Gambling in Mainland China
is illegal. Recently the Chinese
people have been permitted to visit
Macao, where gambling is legal.
As such, the area is booming and
is often described as ‘Asia’s Las
Vegas’. Singapore lifted its 40-year
long gambling ban in 2005, which
allowed casinos in the country to be
opened in 2010.
In Europe, gambling has not been
widely accepted. Tax levies on
market players in many European
countries are higher than other
parts of the world; consequently,
many players may wish to operate
in other geographies. In some
German states, gambling taxes run
as high as 92% of net income and
make it difficult to survive even in
times of economic prosperity.
Substitutes – High
Any leisure activity can act as a
substitute with minimal switching
costs. Online gambling is also an
option.
Competitive Rivalry – High
In 2012, the four largest firms in
the Casino Hotels industry will
account for about 38.0% of the
available market share, indicating a
low to medium concentration in the
industry.
The merger of Caesars
Entertainment Corporation with
Harrah’s Entertainment Inc secured
the dominant positions in the
industry. Industry consolidation has
been a major trend.
The level of industry concentration
has increased significantly since
2007, it is now expected stabilize
over the next five years due to
state regulatory constraints in the
industry and to the monitoring of
federal government agencies over
industry competition levels.
6
Las Vegas Sands Management
Sheldon Adelson
Since founding the company in 1988, Mr. Adelson has been the CEO, Chairman, and Director of Las
Vegas Sands. Prior to founding the company, Adelson built COMDEX computer trade show which
sold for $850 million. He and his family are the principal stockholders owning approximately 52% of
LVS’s outstanding common stock.
Compensation: $13,845,056
Kenneth Kay
Kenneth Kay has held the positions of Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President since
2010. Before joining the company, Mr. Kay served as Senior Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer of CB Richard Ellis Group, Inc from 2002 through 2008 and from 1999 through
2002 he was the Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Dole Food Company.
Compensation: $2,441,362
Michael Leven
Michael Leven has held a number of positions within Las Vegas Sands. He has been the President and
Chief Operating Officer since 2009, Secretary since 2010 and a director of the company since 2004.
Mr. Leven has been the acting Chief Executive Officer and member of the Board of Directors of the
company’s subsidiary, Sands China Ltd. since July 2010. He also serves on various boards including
Hersha Hospitality Trust, and a number of nonprofits.
Compensation: $23,513,560
Robert G. Goldstein
Robert G. Goldstein joined the company in 1995 and has held a number of positions. He has been
the Executive Vice President since 2009 and President of Global Gaming Operations since 2011. He
previously served as the Senior Vice President of the company from 2004-2009 and was the Executive
Vice President of the company’s predecessor, Las Vegas Sands, Inc., since 2009 and its Senior Vice
President from 1995 thru 2009.
Compensation: $9,325,795
John Caparella
John Caparella has been the President and Chief Operating Officer of Venetian Casino Resort, LLC
and Sands Expo & Convention Center, Inc., and Senior Vice President of Las Vegas Sands, LLC
since 2011. Before joining LVS, Mr. Caparella served as the Executive Vice President of Gaylord
Entertainment Company and Chief Operating Officer of Gaylord Hotels.
Compensation: $3,115,388
Management Analysis
Sheldon Adelson has effectively managed LVS thus far. We do not anticipate any complications due to CEO
duality. Adelson is currently 79 years old with no serious health problems reported. A successor is not
apparent. Las Vegas Sands has a staggered board of directors, which is common in the United States. Current
compensation for senior management is on par with other large gaming companies.
7
SWOT Analysis
Strengths
• Geographically diversified within the most popular casino destinations in the world. LVS has a duopoly in
Singapore and has one of only six licenses in China which is currently the largest gambling markets in the
world.
• Financial health has been improving substantially since the recession and is financially better than its
competitors
• Accessibility- More than 1.0 billion people are estimated to live within a three-hour flight from Macao and
more than 3.0 billion people are estimated to live within a five-hour flight from Macao.
Weaknesses
• The proliferation of gaming in California and other areas located in the same region as LVS’s Las Vegas
Operating Properties could have an adverse effect on its financial condition, due to operations or cash flows
• The legalization of casino gaming in or near major metropolitan areas may cause customers to forgo travel to
Las Vegas.
• Actual study shows fewer people are willing to visit Las Vegas if casinos are built near their cities.
• The company does not own 1 of 3 concessions given by the Macao government but rather owns a sub
concession from Galaxy.
• Exemption from Macao’s corporate income tax on profits generated by the operation of casino games of
chance ends in December 31, 2013.
• Sheldon Adelson political affiliation. Opportunity
•
•
•
•
A proposed bridge is expected to reduce the travel time between central Hong Kong and Macao.
Macao draws a significant number of customers who are visitors or residents of Hong Kong.
LVS’s biggest share of revenue is Macao; it is building the biggest tourist complex in the world.
With about 85% of its business leveraged towards Asian gaming, LVS stands to gain big from the current
stimulus programs being implemented in China.
Threats
• The Macao government, with the consent of Galaxy, may terminate the subconcession under certain
circumstances.
• In the event of a default, the casinos and gaming-related equipment would be automatically transferred
to the Macao government without compensation to LVS would cease to generate any revenues from these
operations.
• The sub concession agreement expires on June 26, 2022. Unless it is extended, on that date, the casinos and
gaming-related equipment will automatically be transferred to the Macao government without compensation
to LVS.
• LVS must renew its gaming license next year with the relevant gaming authorities in Singapore.
• LVS is currently under investigation for violation of the Federal Corrupt Practices Act
8
Competitors
MGM Resorts International
MGM Resorts is the largest gaming and hotel company in the Las Vegas Strip gaming market,
with more than 40,000 guest rooms and suites on the Strip, representing approximately 30% of
all guest rooms in the market. The company’s Vegas properties include Bellagio, MGM Grand,
Mandalay Bay, Mirage, Luxor, New York-New York, and a 50% ownership stake in CityCenter.
Strip revenue comprises approximately 80% of revenue.
Wynn Resorts Limited Steve Wynn founded the company in 2002 and now operates four megaresorts: Wynn Macau
and Encore in China, and Wynn Las Vegas and Encore on the Las Vegas Strip. The company is
currently in the design phase for a fifth casino and resort on the Cotai Strip in Macau.
Caesars Entertainment Corporation Caesars is owned by Hamlet Holdings, a joint venture of Apollo Global Management and Texas
Pacific Group, with Blackstone Group holding a minority stake. The name change from “Harrah’s
Entertainment Inc.” to “Caesars Entertainment Corporation” was made official on November 23,
2010. On November 5, 2010, Harrah’s announced an IPO of 31,250,000 shares but retracted this
offering on November 19. Caesars owns 52 properties internationally, which include land-based
casino hotels, riverboat casinos, and Native American casinos. Since its IPO in February, share
price has fallen 53%. Caesars, with debt of over $19 million, has more than triple the burden of
Las Vegas Sands (LVS) and about six times the debt of Wynn Resorts (WYNN).
Ratio Analysis
LVS Liquidity Ratios
Casino Industry Ratio Comparison
Las Vegas Sands has maintained its ability to cover short-term obligations despite investing in growth
opportunities and the economic downturn. Its current ratio has been well above two over the past three years.
LVS has the strongest liquidity ratios for the industry.
9
Ratio Analysis (cont.)
LVS Solvency Ratios
Profitability Ratios Casino Industry
Las Vegas Sands has been improving its times interest earned ratio. A higher value is favorable indicating
a greater ability to repay its interest and debt. We expect further improvements to EBIT will increase the
company’s ability to pay off its loans. In terms of profitability, Las Vegas Sands is a leader amongst its peers, due
to its ideal global locations. After a decline in 2008, profitability numbers have been rebounding strongly.
Las Vegas Sands DuPont Analysis
Casino Industry DuPont Analysis
The Extended DuPont model identifies the factors leading to LVS’s increasing ROE. Since 2008, the company has
substantially improved net profit margin and reduced borrowing. During our forecast period, we expect LVS to
keep reducing its debt and improving margins.
Ratio Comparison
Beta
Operating Margin
Profit Margin
Return On Asset
Return On Equity
Debt to Equity
LVS
1.6
23.11%
14.39%
7.21%
19.32%
0.92
WYNN
1.62
20.49%
11.16%
9.12%
50.47%
9.17
MGM
2.34
9.70%
-6.83%
1.96%
-4.11%
1.42
10
Price to Sales Valuation
5 Year Casino Price to Sales Ratios
LVS
WYNN
MGM
2007
12.43
4.7
3.26
2008
.53
1.55
.53
2009
2.15
2.3
.57
2010
5.31
3.08
1.1
2011
3.69
2.63
.75
Average
4.82
2.85
1.24
2013 P/S Valuation
Projected Sales:
Shares Outstanding:
Sales per Share:
P/S Multiple:
Price per Share:
Probability:
Weighted Average Price:
15% Revenue Growth
$12,489,037,000
822,920,000
$15.18
4.82
$73.15
15%
8% Revenue Growth
$10,163,604,600
822,920,000
$15.18
4.82
$59.53
50%
$60.03
2% Revenue Growth
$9,410,745,000
822,920,000
$15.18
4.82
$55.12
35%
We calculated the five-year average P/S value for Las Vegas Sands. Projected sales were taken from the Proforma
Income Statement and were divided by shares outstanding to obtain sales per share, which was multiplied by the
five-year P/S multiple to determine projected price per share. For our scenario analysis, we assigned weights and
calculated the expected value based on those weights.
Discounted Cash Flow Valuation
Dividend Discount Model
Dividend per Share:
Present Value:
Intrinsic Value:
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Terminal Value
$1.00
$1.40
$1.68
$2.02
$2.42
$2.66
$2.93
$3.22
$3.54
$89.81
$1.29
$1.43
$1.58
$1.75
$1.77
$1.79
$1.82
$1.84
$43.10
$57.36
A 3-stage growth Dividend Discount Model was used to derive an intrinsic value of $57.36 for Las Vegas Sands.
The capital asset pricing model was used to calculate a discount rate of 8.5%, which was used through the first 10
years of our model, followed by a terminal discount rate of 10% and a terminal growth rate of 5%.
11
$(185,571)
$(354,479)
$(354,479)
$14,264
$23,248
$(3,884)
$321,870
$(372,627)
$(50,757)
$(31,218)
$1,017,042
$1,705,771
$(28,740)
$688,196
$533
2009
$4,563,105
$2,876,873
$1,686,232
$407,463
$(191,931)
$599,394
$599,394
$(182,209)
$18,555
$74,302
$306,813
$855,905
$1,162,718
$(56,423)
$923,623
$1,758,854
$1,180,586
$833,448
$1,783
2010
$6,853,182
$3,875,187
$2,977,995
$1,269,508
$(290,615)
$1,560,123
$1,560,123
$(322,996)
$22,554
$211,704
$282,949
$2,094,823
$2,377,772
$(22,318)
$1,010,685
$2,087,978
$2,389,887
$1,065,984
$11,309
2011
$9,410,745
$4,922,677
$4,488,068
$1,734,589
-
$1,734,589
$1,734,589
$(325,235)
$21,452
$(180,809)
$257,157
$1,928,103
$2,185,260
$(102,915)
$947,918
$3,132,415
$2,288,174
$2,168,236
$16,262
2012E
$10,841,178
$5,420,589
$5,420,589
$1,998,246
-
$1,998,246
$1,998,246
$(374,671)
$20,854
$254,176
$278,549
$2,541,759
$2,644,674
$(102,915)
$980,389
$3,496,930
$2,747,588
$2,497,807
$18,734
$2,301,979
-
$2,301,979
$2,301,979
$(431,621)
$21,620
$295,939
$300,912
$2,959,393
$3,062,307
$(102,915)
$1,129,409
$4,028,464
$3,165,222
$2,877,474
$21,581
$2,651,880
-
$2,651,880
$2,651,880
$(497,228)
$21,309
$344,051
$323,994
$3,440,506
$3,543,421
$(102,915)
$1,301,079
$4,640,790
$3,646,335
$3,314,850
$24,861
2015E
$16,574,251
$8,287,126
$8,287,126
$3,054,966
-
$3,054,966
$3,054,966
$(572,806)
$21,261
$399,475
$347,424
$3,994,749
$4,097,664
$(102,915)
$1,498,843
$5,346,191
$4,200,578
$3,818,708
$28,640
2016E
$19,093,538
$9,546,769
$9,546,769
2013E
2014E
$12,489,037 $14,387,371
$6,244,519 $7,193,686
$6,244,519 $7,193,686
$(540,050)
Income Statement
Total Revenue
Cost of Revenue
Gross Profit
Research
Development
Selling General and
Administrative
Other
Operating Expenses
Operating Income
Total Other Income/
Expenses Net
Earnings Before
Interest And Taxes
Interest Expense
Income Before Tax
Income Tax Expense
Minority Interest
Other
Net Income From
Continuing Ops
Net Income
Preferred Stock And
Other Adjustments
Net Income Applicable To Common
Shares
12
Liabilities
Accounts Payable
Short/Current Long Term Debt
Total Current Liabilities
Long Term Debt
Other Liabilities
Deferred Long Term Liability
Charges
Minority Interest
Total Liabilities
Total Current Assets
Property Plant and Equipment
Other Assets
Total Assets
Net Receivables
Inventory
Other Current Assets
Current Assets
Cash And Cash Equivalents
$410,834
$234,607
$660
$473,833
$5,141,599
$1,089,888
$14,310,573
$887,219
$952,086
$1,839,305
$10,852,147
$81,959
$447,274
$5,623,674
$13,351,271
$1,597,161
$20,572,106
$487,208
$27,073
$35,336
$5,074,057
2009
$6,662,991
$503,379
$207,356
$708
$880,703
$5,574,224
$1,268,197
$13,877,938
$1,316,364
$1,284,049
$2,600,413
$9,373,755
$78,240
$557,333
$4,058,907
$14,502,197
$2,483,204
$21,044,308
$778,525
$32,260
$46,726
$3,201,396
2010
$7,850,689
$733
$2,145,692
$5,704,264
$1,588,463
$14,393,434
$1,682,951
$815,755
$2,498,706
$9,577,131
$89,445
$639,689
$5,397,152
$15,030,979
$1,815,992
$22,244,123
$1,409,009
$34,990
$45,607
$3,907,546
2011
$8,821,320
$5,761,307
$733
$3,059,281
$1,913,698
$13,231,980
$1,259,928
$857,189
$2,117,117
$8,571,886
$100,000
$529,279
$5,513,325
$14,334,645
$2,205,330
$22,053,300
$1,957,618
$40,239
$44,107
$3,471,362
2012E
$9,727,779
$5,818,920
$733
$3,908,126
$2,288,369
$14,591,669
$1,406,170
$928,497
$2,334,667
$9,284,966
$100,000
$583,667
$6,079,862
$15,807,641
$2,431,945
$24,319,448
$2,158,093
$46,274
$48,639
$3,826,856
2013E
$10,708,668
$5,877,109
$733
$4,830,826
$2,719,991
$16,063,002
$1,567,039
$1,003,041
$2,570,080
$10,030,411
$100,000
$642,520
$6,692,917
$17,401,585
$2,677,167
$26,771,669
$2,374,881
$53,215
$53,543
$4,211,278
2014E
$11,764,183
$5,935,880
$733
$5,827,570
$3,217,218
$17,646,275
$1,743,424
$1,079,980
$2,823,404
$10,799,802
$100,000
$705,851
$7,352,614
$19,116,797
$2,941,046
$29,410,458
$2,607,978
$61,198
$58,821
$4,624,618
2015E
$12,892,345
$5,995,239
$733
$6,896,373
$3,790,024
$19,338,517
$1,936,084
$1,158,079
$3,094,163
$11,580,789
$100,000
$773,541
$8,057,715
$20,950,060
$3,223,086
$32,230,862
$2,856,884
$70,377
$64,462
$5,065,993
2016E
Balance Sheet
Stockholders’ Equity
Misc Stocks Options Warrants
Redeemable Preferred Stock
Preferred Stock
Common Stock
Retained Earnings
Treasury Stock
Other Stockholder Equity
$5,850,699
Period Ending
Assets
Total Stockholder Equity
13
Period Ending
Net Income
$637,906
$379,945
$(178,746)
$241,812
$1,759
$(75,320)
2009
$(354,479)
$772,707
$320,918
$(332,924)
$400,622
$(4,941)
$(67,834)
2010
$599,394
$876,540
$335,232
$(789,163)
$389,582
$(2,841)
$(29,973)
2011
$1,560,123
$976,540
$335,232
$(748,609)
$870,346
$(5,249)
$(50,000)
2012E
$1,734,589
$1,076,540
$375,000
$(400,475)
$535,824
$(6,036)
$(50,000)
2013E
$1,998,246
$1,276,540
$400,000
$(416,788)
$1,031,215
$(6,941)
$(50,000)
2014E
$2,301,979
$1,476,540
$400,000
$(433,097)
$712,209
$(7,982)
$(50,000)
2015E
$2,651,880
$1,676,540
$400,000
$(448,906)
$1,223,875
$(9,180)
$(50,000)
2016E
$3,054,966
Statement of Cash Flows
Operating Activities,
Depreciation
Adjustments To Net Income
Changes In Accounts Receivables
Changes In Liabilities
Changes In Inventories
Changes In Other Operating Activities
$5,847,295
$(750,000)
$217,000
$4,749,550
$(750,000)
$217,000
$(533,000)
$4,536,005
$(1,000,000)
$217,000
$(533,000)
$(1,986,163)
$(859,087)
$(16,871)
$3,529,099
$(1,000,000)
$217,000
$(783,000)
$(1,655,136)
$(846,330)
$(16,871)
$3,112,849
$(1,650,000)
$217,000
$(783,000)
$(1,379,280)
$(819,990)
$(16,871)
$2,662,496
$(2,092,896) $(2,023,981) $(1,508,493)
$82,833
$(683,834)
$810,387
$(1,433,000)
$(1,149,400)
$(784,388)
$(16,871)
$(2,862,121)
$(3,000)
$1,870,151
$(698,106)
$(821,000)
$(963,812)
$(16,871)
$(2,518,337)
$(13,292)
$638,613
Investing Activities
Capital Expenditures
Investments
Other Cash flows from Investing Activities
$(2,010,063) $(2,707,815)
$(75,297)
$(817,692)
$(98,775)
$(16,871)
$(2,216,141)
$(13,292)
Total Cash Flow From Operating Activities
Total Cash Flows From Investing Activities
$(93,400)
$241,969
$(1,203,582)
$(6,579)
$(1,950,659)
$(3,292)
$(94,697)
$2,386,479
$1,054,556
-
$(1,801,683)
$(5,292)
Financing Activities
Dividends Paid
Sale Purchase of Stock
Net Borrowings
Other Cash Flows from Financing Activities
$(1,127,557) $(1,093,461)
$46,886
$(5,292)
$3,305,973
$(17,270)
$2,452,175
Total Cash Flows From Financing Activities
Effect Of Exchange Rate Changes
$1,698,213
$865,637
$1,536,864
$(1,918,335)
$795,441
$1,917,253
$(121,833)
Change In Cash and Cash Equivalents
14